Why? I am only winning with 56% of the vote in the online debate sponsored by the Economist on whether we need technology breakthroughs to solve the “Global energy crisis.” I say ‘only ‘ because the other guy’s new post makes clear he agrees with my position entirely. More importantly, I want to crush the breakthrough technology illusion, which keeps attacking the hope for genuine climate action like a relentless, indestructible, killing machine from an apocalyptic future.
You can read my “rebuttal” of my “opponent,” Peter Meisen, here. My central focuses on the must-read 2000 report by the International Energy Agency (IEA), Experience Curves for Energy Technology Policy. Here is the key quote from the report:
If we want cost-efficient, CO2-mitigation technologies available during the first decades of the new century, these technologies must be given the opportunity to learn in the current marketplace. Deferring decisions on deployment will risk lock-out of these technologies, i.e., lack of opportunities to learn will foreclose these options making them unavailable to the energy system….
In short, the time to deploy is now!
You can read Meisen’s “rebuttal” — which I would have been happy to sign my name to — here.
You can read a terrific piece on energy efficiency by a guest poster here.
Oh, and did I mention you should go here to vote.
- The Debate of the Decade Revisited — Avoiding the Technology Trap
- Nature publishes my climate analysis and solution
- IEA report, Part 2: Climate Progress has the 450-ppm solution about right
- Must read: Bush DOE says wind can be 20% of U.S. power by 2030 — with no breakthroughs
- Is 450 ppm possible? Part 5: Old coal’s out, can’t wait for new nukes, so what do we do NOW?
- Do we need a massive government program to generate breakthroughs to make solar energy cost-competitive?
- The technologies needed to beat 450 ppm
- The debate of the decade: Technology development vs. deployment
- Renewable Energy Subterfuge: Bush’s Sleight of Hand
- Chapter Six Excerpt: The Technology Trap and the American Way of Life
- Time to end the phony, and historically inaccurate, debate
- Bush climate speech follows Luntz playbook: “Technology, technology, blah, blah, blah.”